JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Electricity policy: investigating participation in low salience policy processes. A case study of participation in the policy-making process concerning Statnett's application for licenses to trade in electricity with Germany and Great Britain.

View/Open

Year

Permanent link

Metadata

Appears in the following Collection

Abstract

Electricity is the cornerstone of modern society, but electricity policy is rarely debated in the public. Some energy projects, such as new transmission grid or wind-farms, may reach the top of the media agenda and be publicly debated. But for the most part, changes in the electricity sector is implemented without greater debate in public. This thesis is a case study of participation in the policy-making process in one energy project, Statnett's application to construct interconnectors to Germany and Great Britain. The aim of the thesis is to explain the level of participation in and media coverage of the policy process. Two analytical approaches has been utilized. Firstly, the quiet politics framework developed by Culpepper which focuses on the qualities of the issue itself and issue salience as explanatory factors for participation and media coverage. Secondly, the punctuated equilibrium framework developed by Baumgartner and Jones which emphasizes the organization of the policy field and the definition of outsider-groups as explanatory factors. The thesis is based on the following empirical material: official documents, reports and legislation, as well as an argumentation analysis of the public consultation and quantitative analysis of the media coverage of three different energy issues. The main findings are that there has been few participants in the public consultation and very little media coverage of the interconnectors. Participation in the public consultation has been limited to actors and organizations already involved in electricity policy. Both of the analytical frameworks provides valuable insights to explain why there has been few participants. The issue is technical and complex which makes it difficult to understand and represents a barrier to both participation and media coverage. On the other side, the policy field is dominated by powerful actors who sets the agenda, defines the alternatives and provides the information. This makes it difficult for outsider groups to participate. In addition, these two explanatory factors may work together, in that the technical and complex nature of the issue supports and strengthens the position of the dominant actors and facilitates a policy process that is difficult to access for outside actors.